Please remember the following when you read this: America's banks, their surrogate Hedge Fund crony criminals and really STUPID, asleep-at-the-switch governmental jobs-worth bureaucrats (like Bush) caused all this; NOT indigent black families and beer-swizzeling rednecks getting NINJA subprime, option-ARMS loans!
Basically, doing the bailout comes down to a simple A or B decision by Congress:
Decision A: With NO immediate bailout announced and within about 2 weeks max, large numbers of businesses will crash nearly overnight (and not just the big financial firms, as we've seen with AIG). Most damaging?: there will be massive bank runs - especially with small local banks; they're toast. Hundreds of them. The result of this?: the FDIC WON'T be able to contain the damage and Congress will then have to appropriate massive bucks to shore-up the FDIC. This has never happened so there is no precedent for security of funds when the entire back-up system fails at once. We instantly move headlong into a real Depression as a result, same results as the 30's, different reasons. With all the pain of a hyperdeflation (not inflation) due to a severe housing crash, very high unemployment results - like 15-20% within WEEKS - and watch as amazing shifts in typical American lifestyles unfolds, with the turmoil all this implies. Those people around my age who have saved for retirement IN SECURITIES (like they were TOLD to do!) will be nearly wiped-out, virtually overnight. There will be huge social upheaval, this also immediate.
OR.....
Decision B: Congress announces a bailout (the exact details do matter a lot, but not as much as the avoidance of all the points of Decision A). The dollar's value against all the world's other major currencies will plunge and foreign debt holders (China, Japan and the Middle East) will start drawing their money out of American assets (treasuries mainly) - slowly, so they all don't get ass-fucked. To shore up the fleeing capital that supports the unsupportable American lifestyle/system, our government starts to print (more and massive) piles of cash (some for more direct "stimulus" checks to citizens to control social upheaval). This bailout will then start hyper-inflation and we enter a slow-burn descent into a second-rate bankrupt nation. This "slow roast" will happen over about a year. It's the frog who dies in a pot of water where the heat is slowly turned up. But all this will happen within one year, perhaps 18 months - not more.
I prefer the "Shock Therapy" of Decision A, as horrific as it sounds. It's time to meet the real terrorist enemy face-to-face. NO BAILOUT means an ice water bath wake-up call. America's brand of Capitalism appears to be in a death spiral- and in many ways, it is. Although a real Depression spanks every American in the 95% income category (the upper 5% won't feel a thing, but they never will/do), people WILL adapt. Big cars: gone. Big houses: empty, torn down. Stupid lifestyles: gone. Bad politics: we can get on the road to recovery with Obama, however, our military and their contractors will still attempt to find another war to fight - mark my words. There are historical precedents, America's proclivity to find and make war to save its economy is very real.
As I have already mentioned with Fareed Zakaria's observations, when BOTH the country's Political system AND it's economics are in trouble, the future doesn't look good. America is resilient, but we do NOT have many friends in the world now to help. All of Europe is headed into panic mode. England is going down the shitter fast as it always does, even Germany is especially hosed this time around. Japan, CHina and India are basically O.K. since they have massive reserves - of everything. And they'll pull as much of their cash as they can out of a soured investment. MOST of the Latin countries in our hemisphere are at relative arms-length to all this (which is one reason why Costa Rica is still the best "safe" bet for American's, despite the fact that it's economy is totally dependent on the U.S. But Americans like bananas and beaches, a lot). Canada is nothing more than an extension of America, like a fast-food franchise - but it's also pretty safe. The Silly country is cold and damp most of the year- sort of like a large version of the U.K. Personally, I'd rather be surviving in the sunshine, on a beach, in a country that has NO military or particular axe to grind on the world stage...
Our "Bailout" decision won't do anything to fix the most fundamental problem the country faces: housing deflation. This is what financial types are calling "deleveraging" (unraveling the consequences that someone who makes $50K/year can afford a $600K house). House prices will, regardless of either A or B scenario, fall at least another 40%. With decision A of course, the prices will fall precipitously, over just a few months. With Decision B, they fall more gradually, but they likely will go LOWER over a longer period of a prolonged squeeze. Housing prices NEED to correct to about half of what they were at the peak of 2006/7. A 50% haircut, in MOST of the country. Then, people might be able to really afford buying a house. If they still have a job, that is. Or - most Americans jump into a time machine and return to a time of Lords and peasants, Barons and serfs - a new Middle Ages.
Here's another reflection on this intractable bailout problem. This is certainly NOT a good time to OWN A HOUSE! Tens of millions of people have their PRINCIPAL ASSET declining in value while they make outrageous monthly payments for the privilege of owning an albatross! Money into a rathole now. This mainly in America, but duplicated in Britain, our Poodle. You ask: "where did all the value, the money paid for these houses go?" Good question. Answer: It's already been scooped-up, plundered by the wealthy 21st Century robber-barons who live all around me here in CT and NY. A lot of it went to the Hedge Fund assholes, the Wall Street cronies certainly. Piled high in the offshore banks, Euro/Swissand Cayman Island accounts. The barn door to all the goodies was opened, long ago.
Either scenario, to bail or not, is an absolute nightmare for the next Administration. Obama will be hamstrung from the start, thanks to a disasterous decade of neoconservative politics, policy and all the greedy Republican money-grubbers.
Empire fading, declining - or exploding. Take your pick. Some are saying that when two arms have been cut-off and blood is squirting out of arteries, it's no time to think about how to administer cancer therapies. That's a valid point. However, to fix this crisis, we'll need to amputate the legs too. America: a quadraplegic nation. I truly fear this is what WE GET for all the bad karma - hastened in the last decade. It's been piled-up too high.
Some guy I know had his student grant/loan/whatever completely disappear when Lehman Brothers folded
he is fucked, he cant even finish out the quarter here heh
heres a good dadchatSource of this?
Source of this?But won't this collapse have some signifcant effect on other countries if it complete falls through??
I've yet to see how all this will pan out, but I sure am glad to be living in Europe right now.
But won't this collapse have some signifcant effect on other countries if it complete falls through??
yah the crashing of one of the world's largest economies doesn't affect the rest of the first world at all.I never said it wouldn't, I asked if it would significantly, meaning enough to cause turmoil in other markets.
Source of this?
But won't this collapse have some signifcant effect on other countries if it complete falls through??Of course it will. Especially countries like the Netherlands, where I live, where we do lots of business with you guys. We'll be affected for sure. But the economy is actually doing pretty well here right now, so I'm confident that whatever happens in the U.S. will at least not cause me to go back to eating onions everyday.
to add insult to injury it looks as if there will be a conservative majority government here after the elections are over.
if no one takes their money out the banks will survive longer.Well, that's sort of the thing. People will rush to the banks if the possibility of them collapsing is hinted at. Besides, you're absolutely right when you say that withdrawing all one's money is the worst thing to do for the group, it's actually the only thing you can do if you're an individual. That's what drives herd behavior in the first place.
one of the worst things to do is take your money out of the bank (well maybe not in canada but in america) if no one takes their money out the banks will survive longer.
one of the worst things to do is take your money out of the bank (well maybe not in canada but in america) if no one takes their money out the banks will survive longer.I'm pretty sure I learned in school that in Norway, during times of economic crisis, transactions are heavily restricted so that people won't take out all their money, allowing banks to survive. Guess that's one of the positive sides of living in a social country??
I'm pretty sure I learned in school that in Norway, during times of economic crisis, transactions are heavily restricted so that people won't take out all their money, allowing banks to survive. Guess that's one of the positive sides of living in a social country??
Also Norway is pretty stable economically. I've read some shit that the stock market had a bit of rumble, but otherwise things are going good. Glad I'm not American! And sure as hell I'm glad I'm taking education. Just imagining what young uneducated families are going through, bet a lot of those guys are losing their jobs atm.
Do you have any idea how the UK might be effected? I've been trying to follow this but to be honest i know more about politics then econmics and i only know a little bit more then an average person in the UK (as in only a little bit more then not much) about politics (so i have been told).the uk is already being affected please try and keep up with the world around you
fuck I have an account at Wachovia.
the best part is they will swing this as DEMOCRATS...DELAYING THINGS WITH THEIR "FAIRNESS" AND "SECURITY".Ha ha!
holy fuck congrats i guess. is it to that the azn chick i saw in your avy once.^_^ sometimes she posts with my account ^_^
JOE GOT MARRIED LETS BURN DOWN AMERICA QED.
"frack" ~starbuck, battlestar galactica
so how about that impending recession.
wait shaved are you seriously marriedlets not talk about this stuff here and yes i am legally married
by the way stock market went way back up today.
I'd like to know a little more about how this works.
1.) Where is the evidence that points towards a "2nd great depression" if we don't bail out these companies?
2.) Is this $700 billion dollar bailout plan necessary for the average American?
3.) I understand that banks have been making stupid loans to people in terms of housing. How and why is the housing market affected if we decide not to use this bail out plan?
4.) How is the stock market related to this, and does it have any connection to the $700 billion dollar bailout plan?
I've read through the 'dadchat' but it's not very satisfying in terms of proof. Do any of you recommend an economic layman's site (don't care if it's a blog as long as it has decent evidence) that I can read and look up on this further?
5.) The money that was used to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- will that be reflected in the bailout plan?
6.) Why shouldn't we let stupid companies' stupid decisions take their toll? Wouldn't small businesses pick up where the bigger ones left off and continue to grow because they won't make the same stupid decisions?
I was talking to my girlfriend's dad, who is a strong conservative, and he said something to the effect that the gov't should've loaned the money to the failing companies, to make sure we make a profit. Obviously, there's some risk involved, but the interest rates would cover the risk. Thought that was an interesting idea, except for the fact that the same company committees would continue to make the same mistakes, and I was under the impression that a bailout involved a change in that company's administration. (Like with the recent bail-outs of the companies, selling them to more 'responsible' companies, who change company policy, hopefully).
About 90% of the articles I've read about abandoning the bailout seem to refer back to Austrian Economics, di Lise (sp?) and RON PAUL.I know VERY LITTLE about the economy but it would appear to me that this is due to Paul's libertarian ideal of no oversight: these companies got themselves into trouble, so according to Paul they should hang. Regardless of whether they're keeping the entire world economy hostage or not. (This is because libertarians don't care so much for facts as they care about ideology.)
Can someone explain that to me?
Somebody sum it up, I don't think I have the time/patience to honestly read all of that.two words:Your Fucked
Make the dollar drop? Dude... Whats its down to already? Isnt like 2.13 dollar to 1.00 euro now?not even close
so wait, the bailout plan is bad. But the government not doing anything it all is supposed to be worse right.
so are you guys just pissed off because they won't have the tax enacted too because really what did you expect.
bernie sanders is a socialist. kucinich is pretty leftist too but he's kind of crazy so.
uhhh pretty sure it's only like 1.4 or something. are you thinking of pounds?The dollar has been doing VERY WELL lately: http://www.x-rates.com/d/USD/EUR/graph120.html
If the US falls, everyone else is pretty much fucked. Like Steel said, I know a lot of people like to go THANK GOD IM NOT A YANK or IT SURE FEELS GOOD OVER HERE IN ENGLAND but your asses are on the line here too, sorry to say!yeah if anyone is actually saying this they must have their head in a bucket of sand or something.
- To reiterate, this is INVESTMENT and not a GIFT.If this was true, all transactions would be done at market value. Instead the state is paying these banks for shit at a price higher than what they are worth(the difference between what we're paying for and what it's actually worth could be reasonably understood as a gift) in an attempt to keep them afloat. This current crisis can be traced back to the repeal of regulations in the 80's(glass-steagall act) that prevented companies from speculating with money that they don't have backed up in reserve to cover losses, they were able to go hog-wild with people's money and look where its gotten us.
I think it's because it's nice to believe we can do something about the economy, nice enough that we can ignore the fact we're giving 700 billion dollars to save people who fucked us and are doing nothing to take that power away from them. of course if anyone had listened back in like...what, the beginning of the primaries were going on when I first heard about the housing crisis, and I pay zero attention to economics news.
basically this crisis is just a cancerous sore indicative of a way larger problem (c...capitalism rules...free market) and this bill is the equivalent of applying neosporin.
or just yelling at it.
GO AWAY ECONOMIC CRISIS!!! LEAVE! NO ONE WANTS YOU HERE! NOTHING CAN CHANGE WHAT YOU ARE INSIDE!
My friend has said some loan interest regulations were mainly responsible for this, does anyone know more about this?glass-steagall act of 1933 was repealed. It was the removal of regulations on financial corporations and a bunch of bad investment decisions.
Somebody sum it up, I don't think I have the time/patience to honestly read all of that.probably the most important bill written in the past 20 years? who has the time you guys tell me what to think
fuck you i didn't read that shit and i wouldn't expect anyone who wasn't a senator to do so.
glass-steagall act of 1933 was repealed. It was the removal of regulations on financial corporations and a bunch of bad investment decisions.so i guess my friend is making up stuff again
it's not like it is especially long and verbose i really don't see what the problem is.
why is it considered okay to just regurgitate what others tell you?
it's not like it is especially long and verbose i really don't see what the problem is.
why is it considered okay to just regurgitate what others tell you?
The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (aka the BAILOUT BILL) was passed by the senate today.
click here to read this 451-page document (http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/01/news/pdf/index.htm)
Nobody is advocating reading the entire bill. It's just absolutely idiotic for a person to base their opinion on what the blogosphere or cnn thinks of the bill. Most of these idiots didn't read the bill either and are either regurgitating what they heard from a congressional aide (Who do read the bills, aren't exactly the brightest people in washington and in some cases are 18). You don't have to read an entire bill, nobody is advocating reading 400 pages (Since most is fluff anyway). However it would be a good idea to read the meat of the bill to get a better understanding of what it is about. If you are interested in this I believe you have a fundamental duty to inform yourself with the facts and not with someone else's opinions. And everyone is biased. I'm biased, you're biased, wolf blitzer is biased, bloggers are biased etc.
It's not the fact that people don't feel like reading the bill it's that people are saying "While I'm too lazy to inform myself, I want YOU to inform me".
don't know maybe read the bill yourself and make up your own mind about it? Everyone who has actually took the time to read the bill themselves here is a filthy socialist like myself so you might want to I don't know, read it and think about what it means and make a decision for yourself??????
Hey truth, have you read Das Kapital? How could you be a socialist without doing so?
You're also missing the point. Nobody is saying that someone should just download the pdf of the entire bill and read the whole thing, did i ever say to read the whole thing?
I'm really tired of reading in this thread "sum this up for me idk what it means". I don't know maybe read the bill yourself and make up your own mind about it? Everyone who has actually took the time to read the bill themselves here is a filthy socialist like myself so you might want to I don't know, read it and think about what it means and make a decision for yourself?????? Maybe that's too much work.
it's not like it is especially long and verbose i really don't see what the problem is.
uhh...yes.
why is it considered okay to just regurgitate what others tell you?
look at dat bailout go!
okay I'm being facetious but still lmao.
ahaha fuck i am applying for a student loan and i just realized the bank i am applying for a loan from no longer actually exists.
is this what it feels like to live in the soviet union.
i was going to pull all of my money out of the bank today but my money is in a cd until november so i can't pull it out without huge losses. man, don't die until november!!
It's all Clinton guys. What a shit president that man was. What were we thinking??... my god... you treat anything the even remotely challenges your view and throw it out the window as a impossibility... You don't think that a bill passed a long time ago doesn't have any long term effects?
Talk:Bailout Bill
Renaming bill
bailout bill...do we want to call it that? people might think there's someone named bill we're bailing out. it's a little cryptic. BobamaMan2008 (talk) 07:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
For that matter, why do we have the dates all backwards, it goes month, then date. Welcome to America, gooks. POWMickeyCain (talk) 08:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN FLAGGED FOR DELETION NPelosi251 (talk) 10:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
How does babby form in pregnate? HockeyMomWasilla 09:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Kill the blacks
nt DrGoldfingerPaul (talk) 01:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Since my old 401k is doing so bad I should pull out and invest in grillz
Talk:Bailout Bill
Renaming bill
bailout bill...do we want to call it that? people might think there's someone named bill we're bailing out. it's a little cryptic. BobamaMan2008 (talk) 07:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
For that matter, why do we have the dates all backwards, it goes month, then date. Welcome to America, gooks. POWMickeyCain (talk) 08:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN FLAGGED FOR DELETION NPelosi251 (talk) 10:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
How does babby form in pregnate? HockeyMomWasilla 09:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Kill the blacks
nt DrGoldfingerPaul (talk) 01:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
... my god... you treat anything the even remotely challenges your view and throw it out the window as a impossibility... You don't think that a bill passed a long time ago doesn't have any long term effects?
Anyway I NEVER FUCKING SAID THAT IT WAS ALL CLINTON. or EVEN HE WAZ A SHIT PREZIDENT... Fucking putting words in my mouth.
quotin this for emphasis.
comin from a guy whose political opinions basically mirror that of what's popular on the internet at any given time makes that quote even better truth thank you :fogetcool:
nah cynthia mckinney is a joke because she assaults police officers and is a 9/11 truther and a conspiracy theorist. she is like every bad stereotype a liberal could have all rolled in to one and is exactly what leftist politicians shouldn't be.
what does that have to do with what i said at all? if by pander you mean THINK AND ACT LOGICALLY then sure i guess that's what they should do! going around spouting about the dep of defense dumping 5,000 dead bodies into swamps (you know this because your son told you so!!) and that gorg bush.. planned 9/11 from the get go makes you a joke. sorry!
fuck man. fuck! what the fuck!Your post came off as completely insulting, uncalled for, and childish to me. And so does this one. Its like you slip a few grams of troll in your posts.
grrrrrrrrr..........you make me say things i didn't say.................
Hey guy, a bill passed by a prior administration will cease to have long term effects if the current administration possesses enough oversight to repeal it.
I don't completely disregard anything that opposes my view. I just don't agree with this whole idea that today's problems are a result of yesterday's legislation and there was nothing that could have been done to prevent it in the meantime. Maybe if we weren't so goddamn preoccupied with makin' bombs and huntin' TERRISTS someone would've taken a bit of spare time out of their busy fucking day to maybe take steps to prevent the IMPENDING COLLAPSE OF THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.
nah cynthia mckinney is a joke because she assaults police officers and is a 9/11 truther and a conspiracy theorist. she is like every bad stereotype a liberal could have all rolled in to one and is exactly what leftist politicians shouldn't be.
bill clinton had about as much to do with this bill and the crash as the act of cunnilingus which is to say at best a tertiary effect.
OH MRS CAVENDISH I LOVE THE TASTE OF YOUR COOZE...WHAT DO YOU MEAN I HAVE A STOCKHOLDERS MEETING, CANCEL IT, I'M EATING A FISH TACO.
I don't necessarily agree with Mckinney on everything but you're kinda taking cheap shots and intentionally misrepresenting her statements on 9-11 and I don't think a liberal like yourself has any place in telling leftists what they should act like. You guys have a whole lot of soul searching to do before you start taking cheap shots at the green party politicians who, despite all their flaws, are not imperialist ruling class functionaries.
Really, after this bailout bill, democratic party supporters have absolutely no room to criticize anyone on the left.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/nov1999/bank-n01.shtml :woop:
hasn't this basically been in the making since Reagan and the 80s and that phil gramm bill? i know next to nothing about economics but i thought this was LONG OVERDUE thanks to a steady stream of deregulation.
(http://gamingw.net/pubaccess/26631/welcometoamerica.gif)He needs a gun but please add this to the smileys!
yo I know I said PLAN MIGHT NOT WORK but keep in mind seeing the effects of the bailout will take time anyways.
welcome to the recession tho!
bled i once told warped not to buy his sixth copy of chrono trigger just because they added a single dungeon to the game and he just didn't get basic economics that if you buy a game and none of the original creators are at the company that now produces it, all you do is inspire them to remake things with minimal changes.
he actually REFUSED to understand it.
CORRECTION: I WAS COMPLETELY WRONG.
I confused warped with thehunter!
sorry man :(
dow up 75 pnts today looks like recession is over
whyd you quote this!!!I post on my blackberry while waiting for machines to give me graphs at work and sometimes opera mini acts gay. I basically made a wisecrack about being able to retire early with people like him in the market keeping my collectable wallscrolls value through the roof!
warpped665 i'm sorry i made you cryExplanation laced with more troll. :rolleyes: I don't think I had a government class in middle school... but I had one in the second high school I went to (I moved) had almost all republican and conservative teachers. Anyway yeah in that class I didn't do much... and I was half asleep most of the time in that class or maybe I just forgot most of what I learned. Though it been to long so I could be wrong my memory is kind of fuzzy. Anyway yeah, I basically get that we have been under mostly republican control for a long time but that does not 100 percent guarantee that this whole thing has been their fault. One could definitely say that this would suggest this to a degree that it doesn't matter, but that tiny bit of doubt throws me off joining any side in a argument. I've always stayed in the middle of political arguments. In fact, I hate arguing politics. because every time I see people argue politics neither side backs down and it always just turns into a screeching contest of I'M RIGHT YOU ARE WRONG (and oh they wont just STFU and I hear them from all the way upstairs GAHH) and then it would devolve into insults.
From 2000 until just recently almost every aspect of the government has been under Republican influence. Just in case you missed 8th grade gov I'll break this down a bit for you. Since the year 2000 we've had a Republican administration in the White House (executive branch), a Republican majority in the Supreme Court (judicial branch), and a Republican majority in Congress (legislative branch). Maybe the constraints applied to your perception of government still allow the fundamental concept of checks and balances to maintain its integrity under such a scenario, but the unvarnished truth is that the United States of America has been marching to the tune of that grand, sweaty elephant for the majority of this DECADE.
And maybe once again you're just not informed on this topic, but our government is not constructed in such a way that legislation can be passed by one body but not scrutinized, amended, and oh fuck even repealed!! by another. Every fundamental freedom, every law, every tax code etc. etc. is subject to change in new and erotic ways BY whoever happens to be in power at the time or WITH enough support from members of congress and their respective constituents (i.e. you and I).I know. but this bill did in fact get passed (unless my source was outright lying to me, which is possible, I was talking to someone one one of my old friend lists).
But yes, warpped, I fully agree: politics is a dangerous, volatile endeavor that one shouldn't consider discussing in a public forum without...I dunno, possessing a BACKBONE first. I'm sorry my two posts apparently obliterated your thirst for knowledge in the political arena, but then again arguments between two people wearing their big-boy pants generally don't result in one member weeping gently while staring up at the stars, alone and cold. My advice? Don't take everything so seriously and do a bit of personal research concerning how these things work before unceremoniously regurgitating some senseless idea that probably originated within the dark recesses of Bill O' Reilly's puckered anus.When you use the word BACKBONE, do you really mean endurance for politics? because I assure you I'm not a invertebrate when it comes to politics. I'm just exhausted by it.
by "backbone" he means stop being a little bitch and learn how to read. It doesn't matter where you're from, who your parents are, or what you learned in school if you want to educate yourself on politics and things that are going on in the world then pay attention to some of the stuff that people say on this forum, watch the news, and try to read between the lines on everything.I knew what he actually meant by backbone...
You're complaining is incredibly irritating and yes it was partly Clinton's fault, LIKE BLED SAID. But the majority of the blame goes on the stupid shits in office that didn't do anything.
And yes you can win a political argument it is not impossible arguing about politics is healthy and it helps you learn.
end of troll
Less than a week after the federal government committed $85 billion to bail out AIG, executives of the giant AIG insurance company headed for a week-long retreat at a luxury resort and spa, the St. Regis Resort in Monarch Beach, California, Congressional investigators revealed today.
"Rooms at this resort can cost over $1,000 a night," Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) said this morning as his committee continued its investigation of Wall Street and its CEOs.
AIG documents obtained by Waxman's investigators show the company paid more than $440,000 for the retreat, including nearly $200,000 for rooms, $150,000 for meals and $23,000 in spa charges.
"They're getting their pedicures and their manicures and the American people are paying for that," said Cong. Elijah Cummings (D-MD).
"This unbridled greed," said Cong. Mark Souder (R-IN), "it's an insensitivity to how people are spending our dollars."
Appearing before the committee, Martin Sullivan, the AIG CEO until June, said the company was overwhelmed by a "financial global tsunami," and that "no simple or single cause" was to blame.
It is a blatant fact that the United States economy is in dire crisis and we are the cause of this atrocity on the American people. I'm sure you are all wondering why my peers and I decided to go to a Californian spa and a ridiculously expensive one at that. Merely days after getting bailed out by the US government and your taxpayer dollars.
The truth is... I broke a nail counting out the ridiculous amounts of phat dough the US government forked over to bail my multi-billion dollar company out of debt and leering bankruptcy.
Thats right motherfuckers, welcome to the game and I am the motherfucking dungeon-master.
CHECK-MATE
*Flashes 24-carrot diamond-studded cockring
Have fun with that EVER INCREASING DEFICIT you stupid pricks!
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=5973452&page=1
Well, I guess borrowing ridiculous amounts of money because you're an incompetent piece of shit can be tiring work!
Well holy fuck if thats not enough reason for more regulation I don't know what is. Everything thats wrong with capitalism summed up in one handy package right there!
I'm not even a socialist or anything but I can see the left getting a huge kick out of this (in fact its already starting I'm seeing socialist posters like WHY SHOULD WE PAY FOR THEIR CRISIS and honestly its a question everyone should take home with them)
fuck that communism can't work, you don't like how its going now? Imagine giving those top marginal bastards the power to set the bar as low as they want without repercussion.
It's really easy to be a communist when you're rich
Well socialism kinda entails a complete reconstruction of the economy and political system through active participation of the working class to serve the interests of the working class, not just arbitrarily giving power to people without any accountability. Try attending a socialist discussion or lecture event and you may find something you like in all of it and learn a thing or two about what its all about. As marxist economics are further vindicated and working people are further alienated from the current system, were gonna see a huge resurgance of the socialist movement. Its happened before and will happen again.
I would so go to one but I can pretty much guarantee you that there isn't one within a hundred miles of this place I'd sooner find some neo nazi organization. Maybe a college group or something but unfortunately I don't know any college students.
DOW dropped 679 points today (7.3%)
aight im gonna preempt everyone and say you prolly got that someplace so before everyone asks JOE JOE WHERES MY SOCIALIST it might be good to just straight link it.http://www.freedomactivist.net/
I pulled out :(Did u cum on her face?
he's a socialist, or that unions are bad things that drive out of companies.
Thats not necessarily true. They work to gain their members increased salary, jobs, and benefits through political action, rallies, and through working with companies.
I'm in a pretty big union and its not that bad at all the only thing you've really got to worry about are other unions working for cheaper and foreign workers.
heres a good dadchatQuoteCanada is nothing more than an extension of America, like a fast-food franchise - but it's also pretty safe. The Silly country is cold and damp most of the year- sort of like a large version of the U.K. Personally, I'd rather be surviving in the sunshine, on a beach, in a country that has NO military or particular axe to grind on the world stage...
Canada's not an extension of the U.S. We have our own government, culture, history, attitude, military, geography, spelling...It's like saying Ireland is an extension of Scotland.
Although yes, it is cold here for about 6 months of the year...but there are nice beaches in the summer where we can frolick and -in the north- swim...unfortunately a lot of our border lakes are polluted. *cough*
unions used to be worthwile organizations a while back ago. now they are satisfied with helping our cop pals to find the wheareabouts of evil illegal immigrants and stopping strikes by patting the backs of bosses. unions dont inherently cause gains in the workplace, its the fact that in unions it is where generally militant workers congregate.they're certainly not the vehicle for a better tomorrow as they once were in the past(being one of the only places outside of churches where black and white people found common ground and brotherhood), but they're a lot better than nothing and should be supported.
they're certainly not the vehicle for a better tomorrow as they once were in the past(being one of the only places outside of churches where black and white people found common ground and brotherhood), but they're a lot better than nothing and should be supported.
the whole union response to the 'immigrant scare' is evidence of the incompetence of unions as being a form of revolutionary or politically progressive organization. The reaction isn't entirely unjustified but its a case of misplaced blame due to the lack of proper leadership.
regardless of how reactionary or corrupt they can be, they still provide a little bit of empowerment for members and a little bit of protection which can mean being able to stay in ones home this day and age. I've always appreciated the security I had when I had the opportunity to be in a union and I will never forget how fucking terrible it is to work for shitty people and getting fired("let go") over catching the flu because there was no representation.
unions are horrible for small buisinesses that aren't trying to screw over their workers imoevery business is trying to screw over their workers unless they are some sort of collective or co-op. That's where profit comes from...
every business is trying to screw over their workers unless they are some sort of collective or co-op. That's where profit comes from...
Marxism 101
Thats false, small businesses like a 5-man refrigeration repair company would not try and screw over their workers. But unfortunently when it came to my dads business the workers screwed him over instead. Irony is though that they thought the gross pay was the actual profits his company obtained when thats just the pay before the deductions.
And his buisness was doing really well, he had practically every fast food restaurant in Alberta as a customer.
Your father owned the capital(the company, tools, etc) and employed the workers offering them a wage for their work.
Now it wouldn't be very smart for your father, as the business owner, to pay the workers wages that exactly matched the value of their labor would it? Where would his money come from? In order to get a profit to live off of and maintain capital, your father needs to pay his workers less than what their labor actually produces so he can make money off of their work. Follow?
This is how capitalism works! Workers are paid in the form of wages a value less than what their labor actually produces so the employer keeps the surplus value(the difference of what the labor was worth and what the laborers were paid) as profit. Workers get the raw end of the deal.
This is how capitalism works! Workers are paid in the form of wages a value less than what their labor actually produces so the employer keeps the surplus value(the difference of what the labor was worth and what the laborers were paid) as profit. Workers get the raw end of the deal.
this is straight up bull poop. ever tried making a shirt?You really haven't said anything specific about how Marx's analysis of surplus value is false. The example you gave just vindicates it, the boss gives himself more money(surplus value generated by the labor of the workers), pays the people who work for him an amount less than what their labor actually produced, and puts the rest of the money toward the maintenance of capital. I'm not saying that every person who is starting a business does so with fucking other people over in mind, but that's what ends up happening. Raises are a pretty recent phenomenon that started being a regular thing during the labor movement when workers starting demanding it. I don't think it changes the fundamental dynamics of the worker's relationship to capital.
regardless every company isn't out to screw over their workers. the boss gets a higher wage to reflect increased responsibility and investment in the company, wages are divied out and the rest goes back into the company for expansion. sometimes when a company turns over a large profit and has no plans for growth workers are given a raise!
this is why there's differences in pay and we're not all getting minimum wageThis used to be the case until the labor movement stood up to capital, and is largely still the case in the 3rd world where companies produce the most of what we buy in stores.
mabye ht boss deserves that money for making all thsoe filthy workers work toegether to make a shirt...
WHAT ABTOU GUNS.but i can roll my own cigarettes and brew my own beer.... i just need to make my own gun...
YOU CANT BUILD A GUN!!!
I think everyone can argue that they don't get paid enough. I know my mom doesn't get paid enough -- she's the nurse's bitch. Cleans the shit out of old fart's bedpans and washes soiled linen, and a couple of other really grotty things. I don't know what her pay is exactly, but I know she ought to get paid more.
Really though, how do you justify exorbitant 'worth' for payment, at the price of the destruction of the business you work for? Imagine if every worker in your local hospital were to demand a wage, and because of that they have to deny treatment to you. Is it right for hospital workers to be unionized like that? And wouldn't it be in the business's (any business in general) best interest to keep their workers content anyway otherwise people will quit?
Then how do they decide what product to produce next, like, if workers owned SONY when would they invent playstation, psp computers etc?it would be left up to either a necessity or the democratic process. In the case of videogames, I think it would take a pretty low priority to other things.
Then how do they decide what product to produce next, like, if workers owned SONY when would they invent playstation, psp computers etc?
Hm. I wonder what it'd be like to wipe my ass with 1-ply Bolshevik toilet paper.
Hm. I wonder what it'd be like to wipe my ass with 1-ply Bolshevik toilet paper.
You really haven't said anything specific about how Marx's analysis of surplus value is false. The example you gave just vindicates it, the boss gives himself more money(surplus value generated by the labor of the workers), pays the people who work for him an amount less than what their labor actually produced, and puts the rest of the money toward the maintenance of capital. I'm not saying that every person who is starting a business does so with fucking other people over in mind, but that's what ends up happening. Raises are a pretty recent phenomenon that started being a regular thing during the labor movement when workers starting demanding it. I don't think it changes the fundamental dynamics of the worker's relationship to capital.This used to be the case until the labor movement stood up to capital, and is largely still the case in the 3rd world where companies produce the most of what we buy in stores.
mabye ht boss deserves that money for making all thsoe filthy workers work toegether to make a shirt...
i am sure moving stock in the computer is backbreaking labor
You really haven't said anything specific about how Marx's analysis of surplus value is false. The example you gave just vindicates it, the boss gives himself more money(surplus value generated by the labor of the workers), pays the people who work for him an amount less than what their labor actually produced, and puts the rest of the money toward the maintenance of capital.I think the interesting thing here is you refer to the amount of money "that their labour actually produced". Isn't it so that one's pay is [supposed ][/supposed] relative to society's appreciation for the labour? Now, it seems like those two should be identical, but what's out of the equation then is the management of capital (and HUMAN capital) by that boss as an appreciated service. Aren't the workers paying their boss for managing them and their ability to work?
I think the interesting thing here is you refer to the amount of money "that their labour actually produced". Isn't it so that one's pay is [supposed to be] relative to society's appreciation for the labour? Now, it seems like those two should be identical, but what's out of the equation then is the management of capital (and HUMAN capital) by that boss as an appreciated service. Aren't the workers paying their boss for managing them and their ability to work?
EDIT: I know virtually nothing about economics and even less about Marx, so I'm really asking here rather than arguing.
Today I write not to gloat. Given the pain that nearly everyone is experiencing, that would be entirely inappropriate. Nor am I writing to make further predictions, as most of my forecasts in previous letters have unfolded or are in the process of unfolding. Instead, I am writing to say goodbye.
Recently, on the front page of Section C of the Wall Street Journal, a hedge fund manager who was also closing up shop (a $300 million fund), was quoted as saying, "What I have learned about the hedge fund business is that I hate it." I could not agree more with that statement. I was in this game for the money. The low hanging fruit, i.e. idiots whose parents paid for prep school, Yale, and then the Harvard MBA, was there for the taking. These people who were (often) truly not worthy of the education they received (or supposedly received) rose to the top of companies such as AIG, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and all levels of our government. All of this behavior supporting the Aristocracy, only ended up making it easier for me to find people stupid enough to take the other side of my trades. God bless America.
There are far too many people for me to sincerely thank for my success. However, I do not want to sound like a Hollywood actor accepting an award. The money was reward enough. Furthermore, the endless list those deserving thanks know who they are.
I will no longer manage money for other people or institutions. I have enough of my own wealth to manage. Some people, who think they have arrived at a reasonable estimate of my net worth, might be surprised that I would call it quits with such a small war chest. That is fine; I am content with my rewards. Moreover, I will let others try to amass nine, ten or eleven figure net worths. Meanwhile, their lives suck. Appointments back to back, booked solid for the next three months, they look forward to their two week vacation in January during which they will likely be glued to their Blackberries or other such devices. What is the point? They will all be forgotten in fifty years anyway. Steve Balmer, Steven Cohen, and Larry Ellison will all be forgotten. I do not understand the legacy thing. Nearly everyone will be forgotten. Give up on leaving your mark. Throw the Blackberry away and enjoy life.
So this is it. With all due respect, I am dropping out. Please do not expect any type of reply to emails or voicemails within normal time frames or at all. Andy Springer and his company will be handling the dissolution of the fund. And don't worry about my employees, they were always employed by Mr. Springer's company and only one (who has been well-rewarded) will lose his job.
I have no interest in any deals in which anyone would like me to participate. I truly do not have a strong opinion about any market right now, other than to say that things will continue to get worse for some time, probably years. I am content sitting on the sidelines and waiting. After all, sitting and waiting is how we made money from the subprime debacle. I now have time to repair my health, which was destroyed by the stress I layered onto myself over the past two years, as well as my entire life -- where I had to compete for spaces in universities and graduate schools, jobs and assets under management -- with those who had all the advantages (rich parents) that I did not. May meritocracy be part of a new form of government, which needs to be established.
On the issue of the U.S. Government, I would like to make a modest proposal. First, I point out the obvious flaws, whereby legislation was repeatedly brought forth to Congress over the past eight years, which would have reigned in the predatory lending practices of now mostly defunct institutions. These institutions regularly filled the coffers of both parties in return for voting down all of this legislation designed to protect the common citizen. This is an outrage, yet no one seems to know or care about it. Since Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith passed, I would argue that there has been a dearth of worthy philosophers in this country, at least ones focused on improving government. Capitalism worked for two hundred years, but times change, and systems become corrupt. George Soros, a man of staggering wealth, has stated that he would like to be remembered as a philosopher. My suggestion is that this great man start and sponsor a forum for great minds to come together to create a new system of government that truly represents the common man's interest, while at the same time creating rewards great enough to attract the best and brightest minds to serve in government roles without having to rely on corruption to further their interests or lifestyles. This forum could be similar to the one used to create the operating system, Linux, which competes with Microsoft's near monopoly. I believe there is an answer, but for now the system is clearly broken.
Lastly, while I still have an audience, I would like to bring attention to an alternative food and energy source. You won't see it included in BP's, "Feel good. We are working on sustainable solutions," television commercials, nor is it mentioned in ADM's similar commercials. But hemp has been used for at least 5,000 years for cloth and food, as well as just about everything that is produced from petroleum products. Hemp is not marijuana and vice versa. Hemp is the male plant and it grows like a weed, hence the slang term. The original American flag was made of hemp fiber and our Constitution was printed on paper made of hemp. It was used as recently as World War II by the U.S. Government, and then promptly made illegal after the war was won. At a time when rhetoric is flying about becoming more self-sufficient in terms of energy, why is it illegal to grow this plant in this country? Ah, the female. The evil female plant -- marijuana. It gets you high, it makes you laugh, it does not produce a hangover. Unlike alcohol, it does not result in bar fights or wife beating. So, why is this innocuous plant illegal? Is it a gateway drug? No, that would be alcohol, which is so heavily advertised in this country. My only conclusion as to why it is illegal, is that Corporate America, which owns Congress, would rather sell you Paxil, Zoloft, Xanax and other additive drugs, than allow you to grow a plant in your home without some of the profits going into their coffers. This policy is ludicrous. It has surely contributed to our dependency on foreign energy sources. Our policies have other countries literally laughing at our stupidity, most notably Canada, as well as several European nations (both Eastern and Western). You would not know this by paying attention to U.S. media sources though, as they tend not to elaborate on who is laughing at the United States this week. Please people, let's stop the rhetoric and start thinking about how we can truly become self-sufficient.
With that I say good-bye and good luck.
All the best,
Andrew Lahde